550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 276,716 times 369 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
Holding that because "a plaintiff must show . . . a primary violation by the controlled person" in order to "establish a prima facie case of control[-]person liability," a plaintiff who "fails to allege any primary violation . . . cannot establish control[-]person liability"
Holding section 78u-4(b) does not literally require pleading of all facts, so long as facts pleaded provide adequate basis for believing statements were false
Holding that when determining whether a statement made by a corporation was made with scienter it is “appropriate to look to the state of mind of the individual corporate official or officials who make or issue the statement ... rather than generally to the collective knowledge of all the corporation's officers and employees”
Holding district court could, at pleading stage, "presume" corporate officers who had "direct involvement . . . in [corporation's] financial statements" were responsible for misleading information contained in corporation's prospectus
Holding that owner-officer who collaborated in unlawful conduct of firm may be held jointly and severally liable with firm for disgorgement of unlawful gains received
Holding plaintiffs' failure to provide information regarding sales made by insiders at times outside the class period permitted no possibility of comparison